►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Okay
sounds
good.
I
am
just
pulling
up
the
control
panel
and
all
of
my
notes
on
screen,
so
I
will
be
ready
in
a
moment
too.
B
I'm
doing
okay,
how
are
you
pretty
good
thanks,
good
clerks
are
we,
I
see
it's
9
31.
B
Are
we
all
set
to
go.
B
Okay-
and
I
will
before
we
start
just
ask-
I
have
the
control
panel
remote,
but
I
haven't
shared
remotely
before
so
welcome
any
support
on
that
end
from
the
chambers.
Thank
you
okay,
good
morning
and
welcome
this
is
a
business
license
hearing
regarding
the
chief
license,
inspector's
decision
to
suspend
the
business
license
issued
to
and
I'm
just
going
to
make
sure
I
get
your
names
right,
daniel
pie,
chuck,
pietzu
pietsu.
B
I
was
way
wrong,
but
thank
you,
okay,
daniel
pietsu
and
sheena
graham
for
a
short
term
rental
accommodation
at
1351,
east
19th
avenue.
B
Please
note
that
if
my
connection
is
lost
during
any
portion
of
this
meeting,
we
will
recess
the
meeting
until
my
connection
is
restored.
If
a
council
member
attending
by
electronic
means
loses
connection
during
the
voting
process,
staff
are
available
to
get
you
back
online
quickly.
While
the
voting
process
is
suspended.
B
The
staff
contact
information
has
been
circulated
to
you,
video
of
council
members
speaking
and
vote
results
will
be
projected
on
the
live
stream
when
available
for
council
members
participating
by
electronic
means
in
accordance
with
section
14.13
of
the
procedure.
Bylaw,
please
ensure
your
video
is
turned
on
and
let
the
clerks
know
if
you
leave
the
meeting
for
the
purposes
of
confirming
quorum,
and
we
acknowledge
that
we're
on
the
unseated
territories
of
the
musqueam
squamish
and
slavetooth
nations.
We
thank
them
for
having
cared
for
this
land
and
look
forward
to
working
with
them
in
partnership.
C
Good
morning
we
have
counselor
boyle
as
chair
and,
yes,
president
counselor
dj
nova
present.
B
Great
thank
you.
So
we
will
start
with
opening
remarks
from
ian
dixon
council
for
the
city
of
vancouver.
D
Comments,
this
is
a
business
license
hearing
to
consider
the
suspension
of
the
business
license
that
was
issued
to
the
licensees
who
are
on
the
or
on
the
line
here.
This
is
the
first
time
I've
done
one
of
these
in
a
hybrid,
more
hybrid
way,
so
I'll
try
to
I've
got
some
light
shining
right
on
my
face
as
well,
so
your
powers
to
issue
a
business
license
or
set
out
in
section
275
of
the
vancouver
charter.
D
I
don't
propose
to
take
you
through
that
and
the
chief
license
inspector
has
the
power
to
suspend
licenses
and
that
power
is
found
in
section
277
of
the
vancouver
charter.
This
is
a
slightly
different
situation
that
bears
some
explanation
with
regard
to
short-term
rental
licenses
in
the
manner
in
which
they
are
issued.
D
Short-Term
rental
licenses
in
the
city
of
vancouver
are
issued
based
on
an
online
application.
You
simply
apply
for
the
license
and
a
license
is
issued.
If
you
answer
all
the
all
the
questions
that
are
given
there,
the
city
doesn't
go
out
and
review.
Each
staff
do
not
review
each
of
those
licenses
before
they
are
initially
issued.
But
what
does
happen
is
that
periodically
various
licenses
are
audited
or
there
are
complaints,
and
then
they
are
reviewed.
So
the
structure
of
the
licensing
process-
that's
better,
I
can.
D
You
can
see
me
a
little
bit
better
now,
for
better
or
for
worse
is
that
a
license
is
issued
initially
to
the
to
the
licensee
who
applies
for
it,
regardless
of
whether
their
property
or
their
situation
actually
applies,
is
actually
eligible
under
the
bylaw
and
then
the
city,
periodically
reviews
them
and
in
circumstances
in
which
staff
determine
in
their
view,
that
the
property
or
the
circumstances
don't
don't
support
a
license
being
for
that
particular
property.
D
The
then
a
suspension
is
issued
by
the
chief
licensed
inspector
and
that's
the
circumstance
that's
occurred
here
is
that
the
2021
license
was
issued
and
then
the
there
was
a
an
inspection
of
the
premises
and
it
was
determined
by
city
staff
that,
in
their
view,
the
premises
were
not
eligible
for
a
short-term
rental
license
for
a
couple
of
reasons
that
you'll
hear
from
mr
miyagi
miyaji
about
in
in
a
few
moments.
D
So
that
is
why
we're
dealing
with
suspension
in
terms
of
the
decision
that
you
have
to
make
at
the
end
of
the
day
today
is
that
this
is
because
of
the
turn
of
the
year.
This
was
a
suspension
of
the
2021
business
license
and
there
is
no
extant
2022
license
at
the
at
present.
If
it's
your
view
at
the
end
of
this
that
that
the
a
license
is
issuable
for
this
particular
premises,
your
eventual
decision
would
be
to
allow
issuance
of
a
2022
license
or
with
conditions
if
you
so
fit.
D
As
you
will
see
it's
the
city,
it's
staff's
position
with
respect
to
this,
that
this
is
not
a
premises
that
is
eligible
for
a
short-term
rental
license
and
there's
two
substantive
reasons
for
that
that
mr
miyaji
will
inform
you
of
just
in
terms
of
the
procedure
this
morning.
The
the
this
is.
This
is
a
quasi-judicial
hearing
and
the
rules
of
natural
justice
apply
the
license
holders
entitled
to
hear
the
allegations
against
them.
They
may
respond
to
those
allegations.
D
D
Yes,
the
city
calls
the
deputy
chief
licensed
inspector
og.
D
Managing
for
the
benefit
of
all
concerned,
I
will
be
referring
to
the
documents
in
the
evidence
binder
in
front
of
you.
E
D
And
that's
the
notice
of
hearing
for
today's
hearing
is
that
correct.
D
E
Yes,
that
is
correct,
and
just
just
to
note
that
the
name
and
the
address
of
the
property
owners
are
also
on
the
top
left.
There.
D
So
and
then
at
tab
three,
we
have
an
order
that
was
issued
to
the
appellants,
and
this
order
is
for
a
city
building
inspector
to
attend
at
the
property.
On
monday
this
september,
27
2021.
was
this
your
first
under
involvement
with
this
property.
E
Yes,
although,
as
deputy
chief
licensed
inspector
and
assistant
director
for
community
standards,
I
frequently
review
case
files
with
my
staff,
who
actually
put
this
together
and
also
did
the
inspections,
and
so
I
do
have
some
familiarity
with
this
particular
case
file.
This
this
detailed
access
order
is
what
we
call
it.
We
post,
we
request
this
or
use
this
process
when
an
access
is
not
as
forthcoming
or
voluntarily
provided.
So
then
we
use
an
order
process.
E
D
E
That
is
correct,
so
this
is
the.
This
is
the
document
that
the
the
site,
inspector
or
the
field
inspector,
if
you
will,
or,
as
you
say,
the
prop
property
use
inspector-
is
a
proper
term
when
they
go
through
the
property.
They
fill
out
this
form
and
it
goes
into
a
fairly
good
detail
of
what
the
property
contains
in
terms
of
the
inspection
and
if
I
may
continue
to
direct,
if
you
go
to
page
seven
or
actually,
if
you
look
at
page
six,
the
the
first
page,
you
have
main
floor
second
floor.
E
You
see
basement
as
identified,
and
so
the
inspector
in
his
review
of
the
property
identified
or
noticed
a
basement
that
was
developed
and
if
you
look
at
the
commentary
below
and
we
can
get
into
more
of
the
details
in
the
forthcoming
photographs,
the
the
inspector
identified
this
basement
as
a
an
unauthorized
secondary
suite
and
in
the
comments
below
it
does
cite
that
he
had
mentioned
that
to
the
property
owner
as
well,
along
with
the
so
when
we
call
it
illegal,
secondary
suite.
E
That
means
the
suite
was
not
there
or
it's
not
on
the
original
plans
and
we'll
we'll
get
to
those
information
further
on
into
the
package,
in
addition
to
the
illegal
basement
suite
and
when
we
call
it
also
illegal,
it's
also
work
without
permit.
So
it's
not
zoned
for
this
particular
suite
to
be
there
and
it's
also
not
been
inspected
properly.
E
So
the
proper
permits
have
not
been
obtained
and
therefore
the
inspections
haven't
been
done,
and
so,
therefore,
arguably
it
could
be
an
unsafe
property
without
the
property
inspections
being
done.
In
addition
to
the
suite
being
illegal.
E
E
Non-Compliant
construction
on
the
site:
if
you
go
to
page
9,
it
just
cites
the
violations
that
formerly
our
inspectors
identify-
and
it
says
here
in
the
top.
One
inspection
today
reveal
that
unauthorized
suite
has
been
installed
in
the
basement
of
this.
One
fd
means
one
family,
essentially
without
permit
or
approval,
and
then
it
cites
the
the
deck
and
the
and
the
the
sun
room
construction
as
well.
So
it
cites
those
two
other
violations.
E
The
basement
you'll
see
on
page
20,
just
some
photos
of
how
you
access
the
basement
and
then
on
21.
E
E
You
just
see
a
fire
extinguisher
and
a
fire
exit
plan
for
the
basement.
Those
are
requirements
for
the
short-term
rental
activities.
Also,
so
it's
good
to
see
those
in
place
and
then
I'm
just
gonna
these
other
things
about
the
sundeck
and
whatnot.
These
are
also
illegal,
and
so
therefore
they
were
photos
were
taken
of
those
what's
of
interest
I'll
advance,
you
to
page
28
you'll,
see
photo
number
37,
and
that
is
a
zoom-up
of
what
we
have
on
plans.
E
However,
it
would
have
been
designed
and
just
to
show
that
the
photo
38
is
it's
kind
of
flipped
over,
but
that
is
the
layout
of
the
basement.
Currently,
however,
the
photo
37
is
supposed
to
be
what
is
in
place.
So
so
clearly,
the
inspector
has
identified
that
this
is
a
unlawful,
secondary
suite.
E
The
other
photos
just
verify
page
29
30..
It
just
verifies
that
these
construction
has
not
been
documented,
no
permits,
and
so
therefore,
the
the
plan
once
again
identifies
that
it's
supposed
to
be
an
unfinished
suite.
D
So
yeah
and
then
over
at
page
so
having
having
observed
all
of
that.
What
conclusion
do
you
reach
with
regard
to
the
eligibility
of
this?
This
premises
for
a
short-term
rental
license.
E
Yes,
through
the
chair,
inspections
are
very
powerful
tools
for
us
and
we
do
frequently
go
out
to
various
secondary
short-term
rental
locations
to
verify
various
activities
and
confirm
what's
out
there,
and
it
is
clear
to
us
that
through
documented
means
and
also
a
visual
inspection
retained
by
photo
that
that
the
suite
is
is
not
supposed
to
be
there.
According
to
the
plans,
it's
not.
The
property
hasn't
been
properly
zoned
for
that
as
well,
and
so
we
do
conclude
that
it
is
a
illegal
secondary
suite
amongst
a
couple
other
work
without
permits.
E
That's
been
identified
and,
and
so
based
on
this
inspection,
and
this
in
the
in
this
particular
case.
For
this
inspection
alone,
we
have
fairly
clear
evidence
to
say
that
this
particular
secondary,
short-term
rental
is
not
should
not
be
occurring
in
there.
The
by-law
clearly
states
that
no
second,
no
short-term
rental
should
be
operated
in
an
unlawful
dwelling
unit
and
that's
a
fairly
clear
section
in
the
bylaw
and
and
and
in
in
our
case,
we
were
able
to
determine
that.
D
So
I
just
want
to
pose
a
hypothetical.
Presumably,
this
suite
could
be
regularized
and
brought
into
compliance
if
the
appropriate
permits
were
taken
out
and
the
and
the
zoning
was
appropriate,
which
I
believe
it
could
be.
So
it
could
be
this.
We
could
be
legalized,
correct.
E
Through
the
chair-
yes,
the
I
I
presume
it
could
be
now,
it
would
have
to
be
still
approved
through
different
mechanisms.
Beyond
myself,
however,
there
are
application
processes
that
may
lead
this
particular
area
to
be
legalized.
D
So
I'm
just
going
to
ask
you
if,
if
it
was
legalized,
would
it
be
eligible
for
these
for
the
appellants
to
run
it
as
a
short-term
rental.
E
And
unfortunately,
it
would
not
if
it's
legalized
the
property
owners
would
would
have
to
prove
that
they
live
there.
They
live
in
that
suite
and
it's
clear
to
us
that
they
live
upstairs
in
the
second
and
the
main
floor.
Short-Term
rentals.
E
One
of
the
primary
requirements
for
torento
is
to
to
have
this
activity
in
your
primary
residence
so
for
them
to
legalize
that
particular
suite,
which
they,
I
believe
would
have
the
option
to
do
so.
They
still
would
not
be
able
to
conduct
short-term
rentals
there
themselves,
perhaps
renters
that
go
in
there
might
be
able
to
take
out
a
license
and
rent
it
as
their
short-term
rentals,
but
not
the
property
owners
in
terms
of
how
they
are
residing
now.
D
E
Yes,
the
the
kitchen
would
be
the
primary
identifier.
D
And
I'm
just
going
to
just
to
to
to
take
the
panel
through
the
remaining
materials
that
are
in
here,
I'm
not
going
to
dwell
on
tab
six
as
that's
the
appellant's
response,
tab,
seven
and
eight
sorry
tab.
Seven.
These
are
photos
taken
from
arab,
a
screenshot
of
taking
the
veneer
bnb
rental
for
the
the
basement.
Suite
is
that
correct.
E
That
is
correct,
so
these
are
the
the
pictures
of
the
basement
and
it's
identified
in
the
listing,
as
the
entire
suite
is
available.
E
Hav8
is
a
is
information
that
we
obtained
from
a
third
party
provider
that
allows
us
to
get
an
indication
of
what
the
booking
activities
has
been
at
this
particular
listing.
And
so,
if
you
go
to
the
lower
right
hand
corner,
it's
got
three
documents
that
stays
in
september,
four
documented
stage
in
august
two
in
july,
so
on
and
so
forth.
And
if
you
flip
the
page,
it
has
a
whole
list
that
goes
all
the
way
down
to
january
of
2022.
E
This
allows
us
to
determine
that
there's
been
a
fairly
good
activity
there
and
it's
booked
out
relatively
regularly
month
to
month
and
and
then
it
was
removed
in
october
2021,
I
presume
because
of
the
the
suspension,
but
but
yes
that's
that's
what
that
information
reveals.
D
Do
you
have
anything
further
dad.
E
Just
just
to
say
that
this
particular
one
we
did
not
do
an
audit
step,
which
is
to
interview
the
property
owners
and
the
reason
why
we
don't
do
that
once
again
is
because,
if
the
evidence
is
is
is
very
clear
to
us
through
an
inspection
that
this
is.
This
is
a
breach
of
the
by-law.
E
In
this
particular
case,
there
were
breaches
of
the
the
by-law
determining
that
it's
an
unlawful
suite
so
to
administration
it
is
a
fairly
a
clear
violation
and
and
therefore
the
short-term
rental
activities
would
need
to
cease
there.
D
B
The
the
next
step
I
have
is
that
panel
members
can
ask
questions
of
mr
miyaji
and
then
the
licensees,
so
I
will
go
next
to
counselor
either
counselor
deutsche
nova
or
counselor
weave.
If
you
have
questions-
and
it
may
be-
I
see
councillor
diet
nova
on
the
list.
So
go
go
right
ahead.
Thanks.
A
Mr
mcd,
I'm
just
looking
at
and
I'm
sorry
my
tabs
aren't
exact
because
I'm
looking
at
a
pdf
document
here,
but
in
looking
at
the
listing
it
says
the
entire
residential
home.
So
what
what
I
understand
from
you
is
that
there's
two
separate
residences
and
that's
how
your
staff
would
consider
it,
but
considering
the
listings
as
the
entire
residential
home
is
that
in
compliance
with
the
short-term
rental
license.
E
E
So
we
didn't
assume
that
the
license
or
although
the
license
is
at
the
main
house,
which
means
the
main
floor
in
the
secondary
floor,
the
the
advertising
information
points
to
the
fact
that
the
main
house
is
not
being
rented,
but
it's
the
basement
suite,
and
we
also
obtain
information
from
the
property
owner
during
the
inspection
that
that
that's
the
activity
that
he
does
is
to
rent
rent
out
the
basement.
B
C
E
They
would
have
to
show
that
they
live
there,
and
so,
if
the
paper
documents
say
that
one
person
owns
one
part
or
one
suite
and
another
person
lives
in
another
or
owns
another
suite
that
that's
fine,
but
through
the
short-term
rental
process,
we
do
need
to
determine
that
these
individuals
are
residing
in
their
primary
residences.
C
Okay
next
question:
looking
at
the
real
estate
listing
when
purchased,
it
talked
about
a
renovated
two-bedroom
suite
downstairs:
what
is
the
process
for
a
new
property
owner
when
they
purchased
a
property
that
has
a
suite
already
installed.
E
Through
the
chair,
these
are
processes
outside
of
what
the
city
controls
as
an
opinion.
E
We
would
strongly
recommend
individuals
to
to
check
the
listing
information
for
it
to
be
correct
and
if
there
are
suites
built
into
the
property
and
it's
identified
as
legal
or
just
suites,
the
the
the
property
owners
or
the
buyer
potential
buyers
do
have
the
opportunity
to
check
with
the
city
to
see
and
these
plans
that
I've
shown
the
inspectors
have
shown
where,
where
the
original
plans
that
the
city
has
and
that's
what
is,
is
deemed
as
legal
for
that
property
that's
available
to
the
public,
and
so
they
can
easily
obtain
that
the
realtors
should
be
able
to
obtain
that
as
well
and
and
so,
therefore,
those
steps
is
what
would
be
recommended
to
to
prevent
any
misunderstandings.
C
E
I
think
to
be
prudent
and
it's
a
buyer.
Beware
kind
of
a
scenario
I
understand.
C
E
Well,
I
I
guess
I
can't
determine
whether
what
the
property
owner
is
going
to
do
with
that
suite.
If
they
choose
not
to
secondary
suite
it,
then
they
don't
need
to
do
anything
necessarily
and
just
leave
it
if
they
wish
to
do
so,
but
if
they
intend
to
occupy
it
in
in
any
particular
ways
whether
renting
a
long-term
rental
so
depending
on
their
activity,
they
would
need
to
take
the
the
legal
steps
to
make
sure
that
that
particular
space
is
legal
and
and
done
safely
with
the
proper
permits.
E
The
inspector
did
identify
that
it's
an
illegal
suite
so
to
us.
E
When
it's
worked
with
a
permit,
there
may
not
be
blatant
life
safety
issues
like
low
ceilings
or
access,
but
because
of
the
fact
that
it
worked
without
permit.
We
would
deem
it
not
not
safe
if
you
will,
unless
until
the
proper
inspections
have
been
done,.
B
Thank
you,
councillor
weeb,
and
I
have
a
few
questions
myself
though
a
couple
of
them
were
just
asked
by
councillor
weave.
I
am
curious
to
just
better
understand
the
options
here,
so
the
basement
suite
is
an
illegal
or
non-compliant
suite.
Is
that
could
could
the
homeowners
rent
it
out
to
long-term
tenants,
as
the
documents
suggest
has
been
happening
for
many
decades.
E
Technically,
as
it
stands
now,
no
because
it's
it
still
needs
to
be
it's
a
work
without
permit,
so
that
needs
to
be
permitted
once
that's
legalized.
Yes,
they
could
rent
it
as
a
secondary
long-term
rental
if
they
wish
to
do
so.
B
Okay-
and
we
know
there
are
many
secondary
suites-
that
aren't
I
mean
it's
been
rented
for
a
long
time.
There
are
many
secondary
suites
around
the
city
that
are
that
exist
in
this
sort
of
gray
area.
Can
I
just
clarify?
I
guess
I
know
this.
B
I
understand
the
rule.
Is
it
it
needs
to
become
legalized,
but
there
isn't
a
licensing
process
for
a
secondary
suite
like
they're
like
for
a
long-term
rental
like
there
is
for
a
short-term
rental,
so
it
would
be
a.
B
D
Are
required
to
be
licensed
in
business
you're,
correct
that
that
that
there
are
lots
of
quote
unquote,
illegal
suites
that
are
rented
throughout
vancouver.
They
are
contrary
to
the
bylaws.
So
from
staff's
point
of
view.
Obviously,
if
we
don't
find
them,
we
don't
we're
not
actively
looking
for
such
suites,
but
once
they
come
to
our
attention
staff's
attention,
it
is
the
obligation
of
city
staff
to
enforce
the
bylaws
as
they
exist.
D
So
it's
not
a
gray
area
at
all,
actually,
they're
actually
they're
work
without
permit
and
illegal
suites
and
are
contrary
to
the
bylaws.
So
if
someone
were
to
come
in
to
ask
for
a
business
license,
which
is
also
a
requirement
for
an
illegal
basement
suite
the
city
couldn't
issue
one
because
that's
contrary
to
the
bylaw,
it's
it
is
a
it
is.
It
is
a
long-term
difficulty
that
we
have,
with
with
these
quote,
unquote
illegal,
illegal
suites,
but
from
a
staff
point
of
view.
D
B
Okay,
appreciate
you
being
so
clear
on
that.
My
last
question
is
another
question
of
clarity
under
the
short-term
rental
bylaws
that
the
the
main
and
upstairs
floor
as
the
primary
residence
could
be
rented
out
periodically.
If
the.
B
If
the
homeowners
were
going
away
for
a
week
or
like
just
to
clarify
that
there
are
still
options
for
short-term
renting
that
primary
residence
periodically
through
the
year,
and
that
would
require
a
new
license
but
would
be
viable.
E
Yes,
through
the
chair,
if
they
were
to
have
short-term
rentals,
occur
on
the
main
floor
or
the
second
floor,
so
the
the
legalized
units-
and
it's
it's
clear
to
us
that
that's
where
they
live.
Yes,
they
they
could
get
a
license
for
that
particular
space
and
short-term
rental,
that
those
spaces.
B
Okay
and
if,
if
the
decision
from
the
panel
today
was
to
refuse
the
business
license
for
short-term
rental
for
the
basement,
does
that
still
allow
an
option
if
the
homeowners
were
to
decide
to
periodically
short-term
rent
the
upstairs,
which
is
their
primary
residence
or
or
what
are
denying
the
business
license?
Because
it's
for
the
whole
address
today
eliminate
that.
D
Option
the
problem
is
the
work
without
permit
the
multiple
work
without
permit
that's
been
observed
this
as
a
general
rule,
we
don't
issue
any
short-term
rental
license
to
a
building
that
has
work
without
permit,
because
we
simply
just
don't
know
what
standard
that
works
been
done
to.
So
it's
a
safety
issue
potentially.
B
So,
even
on
the
second
and
top
floor
because
of
the
sun,
the
porch
and
sun
room,
a
short-term
rental
license,
wouldn't
be
allowed
on
those
main
and
upper
floor
until
that
work
was
inspected.
E
Correct
the
work
without
permit
would
have
to
would
have
to
be
corrected,
and
then
we
would
then
review
the
property
again
and
and
see.
B
Okay,
I
will
leave
my
questions
there,
counselors
just
checking
to
see
if
anyone
has
any
other
questions
before
I
move
on
to
questions
from
the
licensees.
F
Yes,
thank
you
very
much
so
koji
you
had
mentioned
in
the
very
beginning
there.
The
order
was
provided
to
us
and
you
had
a
remarks
around.
It
was
the
the
order
states,
3.1.6
section,
which
is
a
very
generic
statement
of
obviously
city
having
rights
due
to
our
short-term
license
to
be
on
our
property,
and
you
had
mentioned
it
was
due
to
those
types
of
notices
being
sent
out
for
difficult
access
or
or
non-forthcoming
owners
or
rental
or
owners.
E
G
E
I
I
could
only
assume
that
perhaps
there
was
a
delay
or
there
was
a
not
a
conducive
opportunity
based
on
people's
schedules.
F
And
you
had
mentioned
that
or
if
through
much
research
after
this
event
has
occurred.
Obviously
the
city
stance
on
short-term
rentals
is
you
know
we
we
don't
care
unless
we
get
reports
or
if
we
have
a
random
audit.
Can
you
mention
to
us
how
this
notice
came
about?
Was
our
residence
based
on
this
random
audit
and
and
how
did
that
come
about.
E
Yes,
so
we
have
a
number
of
procedures
that
we
do
to
research
bookings
or
research
listings
and
in
your
particular
case
I
would
have
to
say
that-
and
I
can't
say
specifically
because
we
do
a
number
of
these,
but
when
it
comes
to
our
attention
it's
through
the
means
of
either
complaints
which,
in
your
particular
case,
we
may
not
have
had
that.
But
our
staff
did
the
research
and
we
saw
the
basement.
E
My
understanding
is,
they
saw
the
basement
postings
but
you're
your
property
was
your
license,
was
identified
for
the
main
and
the
second
floor,
the
main
house,
and
so
there
may
have
been
a
trigger
to
there.
I
can't
say
exactly
what
triggered
them
to
do
that
we
have.
We
have
thousands
of
case
files
that
we
look
to
look
and
see.
So
it's
not
a
particular
zoning
in
on
a
particular
individual
per
se.
E
E
The
other
trigger
may
be
that
we
also
look
at
bookings
as
well,
and
you
have
booking
activity
every
month,
and
so
therefore,
we
also
look
at
that
as
well
for
for
high
booking
properties.
That's
a
trigger
for
us
to
take
a
look
and
see
if,
if
it's
a
commercial
type
operation.
E
It's
just
an
administrative
term
that
we
use
and
it's
a
it's
a
suite
that
is
booked
fully
without
a
principal
residence
and
and
it's
done
in
many
ways
to
essentially
have
no
primary
residence
or
that
it's
it's
a
very
high
booking.
So
therefore,
it's
financially
driven
yeah.
So
those
are
those
are
some
of
the
administrative
terms
that
we
use.
F
Okay
and
as
you
had
the
city
presented,
evidence,
seven
airbnb
listing
and
also
you
had
mentioned,
your
staff-
do
research,
obviously
on
high
volume
listings.
So
you
were
also
in
the
possession
of
evidence,
four,
which
was
the
building
plan
which,
without
an
actual
inspection
on
the
property,
you
would
be
aware
of
the
bylaw
violation
of
section
6.4
of
the
zoning
and
development
bylaw
3575,
which
is
ultimately
what
was
mentioned
on
the
inspection
report.
As
the
primary
basement
unfinished,
was
your
department
aware
of
this
prior
to
sending
the
notice
out.
E
Prior
to
the
inspection,
sorry,
if
you
can
clarify
a
little
bit
more,
what
you're
asking
me.
F
F
It
was
listed
as
entire
home.
The
intention
there
was
not
to
necessarily
say
that
we
are
obviously
airbnb
the
whole
the
whole
house,
and
I
will
get
into
some
of
our
evidence
later
on
on
a
bunch
of
factors
there.
But
what
I'm
saying
here
is
evidence
7
airbnb
listing
you
knew
that
there
was
a
basement
suite.
That
was
not
unfinished.
You
also
had
access
to
the
building
plans
from
the
city
dated
in
1973
75
of
that
nature.
Without
an
inspection,
you
would
be
aware
of
the
possible
violation
of
6.4.
F
E
You
know
they
have
access
to
that
any
time.
What
I'm
saying
is.
Procedurally,
we
we
won't
necessarily
go
and
do
a
pre-look
necessarily
it
all
depends
on
the
inspector
and
what
they
need
to
do
as
standard
process.
We
need
to
compare
so
so
in
this
particular
case.
I
can't
speak
to
what
what
vince
did
as
this
necessary
step.
What
I
do
know
is
that
proper
or
not
proper,
but
property
use
inspectors
will,
as
practice,
take
a
look
at
the
site.
F
F
I
I
like
to
clarify
what
you
mean
by
zoned,
as
it
is
an
rt10
lot,
so
taking
into
consideration
that
yes,
the
the
plans
of
this
basement
is
unfinished
something
we'll
talk
about
a
little
bit
later,
but
taking
that
into
consideration,
taking
that
off
to
the
side,
are
you
by
making
that
statement?
Are
you
saying
that
we
would
not
be
able
to
have
a
basement
suite
whatsoever
due
to
the
zoning,
because
when
you
say
not
zoned
you're
you're
saying
because
in
the
city
a
map
which
I
have
a
I
I
apologize?
F
I
was
not
aware
how
I
can
send
the
evidence
that
we
have
here,
but
I
have
a
screenshot
dated
around
the
time
that
our
notice
was
given
of
the
city
map
that
you
can
access.
It
says
we're
rt10
zone.
It
also
states
that
we're
a
two-family
dwelling
classification,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
it
seems
that
you
know
the
city
in
how
it's
been
classifying
our
property
amongst
bc
assessment,
the
city
resources
it
seems
muddled,
and
for
that
fact
I
just
want
to
be
clear.
E
E
E
F
Okay
and
how
would
you
define
when
it
comes
to
the
fact
that
we
have
a
staircase
connecting
all
floors
with
passageways
doors,
as
as
noted
in
the
inspection
report
on
page
page,
8
noted
that,
obviously,
all
smoke
and
and
co
detectors
fire
extinguishers
on
all
floors,
no
key
blocks
on
bedroom
doors,
I
believe
also
the
the
staircase
is
on
page
seven
stairwell
southeast
corner
of
the
house,
so
you're
you're
looking
at
this
as
a
secondary
suite-
and
this
is
one
family
dwelling.
F
So
this
is
our
principal
residence
with
a
staircase
with
no
doors
blocking
access,
well,
there's
doors,
but
they're
passageways
no
locks.
So
in
that
definition,
would
we
be
able
to
short
term
if
we
were
to
obviously
make
this
basement
suite,
finished,
approved
and
all
that
sort
of
stuff
permitted,
and
also
something
that
I
just
learned
today
that
obviously
I
was
not
aware
that
all
of
the
sun
decks,
which
obviously,
yes,
I
understand-
is
a
safety
concern
but
is
not
necessarily
directly
correlated
to
the
basement
suites.
F
E
The
interconnectivity
is
is,
is
was
placed
I
assume
in
there,
because
the
basement
is
unfinished
the
the
quick
answer
is
you
have
a
suite
in
there
with
a
kitchen,
and
so
therefore
that
makes
it
into
a
secondary
suite.
So
and
then,
as
you
mentioned,
all
the
work
without
permit
would
have
to
be
corrected.
If
you
were
to
turn
that
basement
into
a
some
kind
of
a
space
beyond
the
unfinished
original
plans.
F
E
You
would
have
removed
the
kitchen
that
I
don't
have
the
definition
of
what
a
kitchen
is
here
and
unless
mr
dixon's
got
that,
but
I
would
say
that
if
your
renovations
down
there
is
done
legally
and
in
compliance
and
and
meets
the
the
definition
of
not
a
suite
or
a
secondary
suite,
but
just
a
finished
basement,
then
perhaps
that's
something
that
we
would
look
into
as
one
unit.
F
He
had
mentioned
that
the
range,
if
removed,
would
allow
us
to
short-term
rent
if
we
could
also
address
the
compounding
factors
that
we
have
here,
which
is
an
entire
basement
that
was
done
probably
40
years
ago,
but
unfortunately,
as
owners,
we
are
now
going
to
have
to
deal
with
the
brunt
of
that
whole
fiasco.
So
are
you
able
to
clearly
define
and
state
to
us
what
would
allow
us
to
do
short-term
rental
downstairs?
I.
D
Think
that
that's
beyond
the
scope
of
today's
hearing
just
madam
chair,
I
mean
that
is
a
complicated
question
that
would
require
yeah.
There
may
be
a
development
permit
required,
there's
a
number
of
steps
that
have
to
be
done
and
and
suggesting
at
this
juncture
that
that
there
is
no
way
to
make
it.
What
the
exact
criteria
for
making
this
into
an
eligible
space
is
not
is
kind
of
beyond
the
the
scope
of
what
we're
trying
to
decide
here
today.
F
F
D
Again,
I'm
not
sure
how
that's
relevant
to
the
question
if
there
was
an
inspection
here
with
regard
to
this,
this
property
and
the
the
question
before
us
is
whether
or
not
the
the
suspension
was
appropriate.
The
suspension
was
appropriate.
G
Okay,
I
understand
apologies.
We
we've
just
been
trying
to
figure
out
what
we're
supposed
to
do
and
we
have
not
been
even
given
access
to
this
report
until
this
hearing
was
scheduled.
We
haven't.
We've
asked
questions,
we're
not
suppo,
we're
not
sure
what
we
can
do
to
kind
of
to
remedy
this.
So
that's
why
I
guess
we're
here
so.
F
One
last
question:
koji:
I
had
talked
to
the
short-term
rental
department.
Would
you
be
able
to
make
any
comments
on
the
following?
F
I
was
informed
that
well
one
of
the
processes
that
you
guys
have
in
place
is
that
immediate
revoking
of
the
license
and
we'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
how
that
is
very
disconnected
from
obviously
the
work
in
work
without
permits
and
the
other
zoning
and
development
issues.
But
what
was
mentioned
to
me
by
short-term
rentals
is
that
in
one
of
the
steps
that
you
do
is
that
you
ask
for
the
airbnb
listing
to
be
removed
immediately,
which
obviously
we
did
and
we
have
not
done
any
short-term
rentals.
F
We
have
abided
by
everything
that
has
been
asked
by
the
city
or
provided
at
this
time,
which
we
will
go
into
detail.
But
what
was
mentioned
to
me
is
that
we
could
short-term
rental
if,
if,
if
the
definition,
if,
let's
say
a
future,
we
could
short-term
rental
if
the
stays
were
30-plus
days,
we
could
use
airbnb
as
a
platform
to
do
long-term
rentals.
Is
that
correct.
E
So
I'm
not
sure
what
exactly
was
relayed
to
you
and
I
can't
speak
for
every
clerk
that
you've
come
in
contact
with,
but
the
the
the
general
underlying
statement
is
correct,
where
if
all
things
are
legal
and
you
maintain
the
suite
yeah
the
option
that
you
have
includes
doing
a
long-term
rental.
E
B
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
So
we'll
now
move
on
to
opening
remarks
from
the
licensees
and
then
any
witnesses.
If
you
have
any
witnesses,
I'm.
A
B
Okay,
you've
been
removed,
but
thanks
for
flagging
that,
for
me,
counselor
teach
nova
so
back
over
to
the
licensees.
F
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you,
council
members
for
hearing
our
case
on
this
matter.
F
F
We
come
from
backgrounds
from
owning,
for
we
come
from
backgrounds
where
owning
a
house
was
the
ultimate
goal.
I
come
from
a
polish
immigrant
family
first
generation,
my
wife
comes
from
a
single
mother,
a
single
mother,
home
single
mother
family.
F
We
moved
in
may
2019
to
the
house
that
we
currently
live
in
1351,
19
east
19th
avenue
we
applied
for
short-term
rental
in
december
2019
and
have
been
able
to
go
through
the
unfortunately
quite
easy
process
of
getting
the
short-term
rentals,
but
we've
always
been
able
to
abide
by
all
safety
standards
and
guidelines,
provided,
as
noted
by
the
inspection
report,
that
we
have
everything
that
is
needed
to
have
a
safe
home
for
ourselves
and
for
for
guests.
F
We
used
to
live
in
a
condo
in
mount
pleasant
and
had
both
our
families
visit
visit
from
victoria.
Often.
This
is
why
we
have
decided
to
do
short-term
rental.
It
is
not
for
commercial
purposes
or
financially
driven
means,
however,
with
kovid
and
the
loss
of
my
wife's
job.
It
did
help
to
alleviate
our
financial
situation,
although
we
do
enjoy
having
people
around
the
world
visit
and
stay,
and
that
has
always
been
something
that
we
take
great
pride
in.
G
Ultimately,
though,
the
reason
we
purchased
this
house
and
pushed
ourselves
financially
to
get
into
this
was
because
we
were
having
a
child.
We
wanted
to
have
our
family
be
able
to
come
and
visit
and
be
comfortable
in
our
home,
and
so
the
primary
use
of
our
basement
is
actually
our
own
use
during
covet,
and
when
I
lost
my
job,
like
dan
mentioned,
we
decided
to
short
term
rent
the
basement
out
to
make
ends
meet
since
people
weren't,
really
traveling.
G
We
were
able
to
help
people
who
were
coming
and
having
to
quarantine
in
this
country.
They
would
stay
for
14
days
things
of
that
nature,
so
it
primarily,
though,
the
the
use
of
our
house
we
use
all
of
it.
F
And
and
prior
and
so
to
just
establish
that
this
is
our
home.
This
is
our
principal
residence.
We
pay
no
empty
home
tax.
We
have
a
basement
suite,
however,
that
is
defined
a
set
of
rooms
that
both
our
families
can
come
and
visit.
We
used
to
when
we
lived
in
mount
pleasant
in
our
condo
pay
for
hotel
rooms,
for
our
families
to
stay
during
holidays,
and
so
yes,
we
we
pushed
and
we
saved,
and
we
made
it
possible
for
us
to
own
this
home.
F
I
would
like
to
understand
like
how
long
does
that
actually
take
to
get
all
of
the
proper
papers,
because
from
the
many
sources
from
bc
assessment
from
the
city's
map,
the
zoning
of
this
house
saying
two
family
dwelling
saying
one
family.
This
it
is
is
it
is
a
job
in
itself
to
be
able
to
buy
a
home
and
be
entirely
sure
that
you
are
buying
a
home
that
has
everything
that
is
permitted
and
understood
to
be
lawful.
F
So
we
understand
that
there
are
things
that
need
to
be
corrected
and
when
we
get
to
a
bit
of
our
statements
and
our
evidence,
hopefully
we
will
be
able
to
highlight
that
we
are
homeowners
that
are
willing
and
and
wanting
to
know
exactly
how
we
can
make
this
right.
G
I
phoned
the
city
at
clerks
and
spoke
to
them
on
multiple
occasions
about
this,
trying
to
make
sure
that
we
were
actually
eligible
for
this.
F
B
Thanks
for
clarifying,
I
was
just
going
over
the
agenda
too,
to
make
sure
I
understood
so
this
is
the
opportunity
to
do
all
of
that.
Opening
remarks
is
bro.
This
is
the
moment.
Yeah
thanks.
D
Madam
chair,
if
I
I
can
discover,
I
actually
think
it's
best.
If
it
split
into
two,
is
that
I
I
would
take
it
that
they've
made
their
opening
remark
now,
then,
the
way
you
would
normally
do
this
is
that
is
that
one
of
the
that
someone
would
then
testify
to
whatever
evidence
they
want,
and
then
that
person
would
be
subject
to
the
to
questioning
after
that
that
so
it
does
make
some
sense
to
have
it
as
two
separate
phases.
D
B
Understood
so
so
that
was
an
opening
remark,
we'll
move
into
calling
of
witnesses,
but-
and
that
is
the
section
in
which
you
can
present
evidence,
other
arguments
and
then
the
panel
will
be
able
to
ask
questions
of
that,
as
will
mr
dixon
as
well,
and
then
we
move
to
closing
submissions.
F
Yes,
I
unfortunately
I'm
not
a
legal
professional,
but
I
think
you
know
I.
I
think
that
should
be
fine.
We
obviously
have
you
know
our
side
that
we
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
able
to
to
to
point
out
some
key
events
on
the
timeline.
B
Yep
so
we'll
move
into
that
section
now
it
so
you
continue
to
have
the
floor,
but
not
as
opening
remarks
as
putting
forward
your
arguments
and
and
then
the
panel
will
ask
questions,
so
you
can
go
ahead
with
that.
Now.
F
Okay,
great,
thank
you
very
much,
so
obviously
the
the
order
of
inspection
was
sent
on
august
20th,
2021,
just
to
state
that
that
was
the
first
ever
ever
contact
within
the
city
that
we
were
provided.
So
there
was
no
clerk
that
had
tried
to
call
us
to
establish
any
time.
It
was
a
paper
posted
on
our
door.
Legal
notice
telling
us
that,
based
on
a
very
generic
statement
of
3.1.6
that
the
city
would
come
and
inspect
on
oct
starting
around
october
26
we're
not
october
22nd.
F
Yeah,
so
in
august
of
august
22nd
we
had
contacted
the
vincent
the
property
on
spectre,
a
few
days
after
providing
that
legal
notice.
He
had
informed
us,
I
had
asked
you
know
what
was
the
intention
here.
He
informed
us
that
this
was
a
safety
inspection
and
that
there
was
a
bunch
of
requirements
based
on
airbnbs
to
help
to
obviously
facilitate
the
safety
of
these
of
the
the
space.
F
We
had
talked
in
great
detail
about
the
fact
that
we
would
have
to
have
interconnected
smoke,
alarms
fire
extinguishers,
ex
exit
map,
contact,
details,
emergency
details,
things
of
that
nature.
That
was
what
was
given
to
us
as
owners
as
an
explanation
for
this
inspection,
the
scope
of
the
inspection.
However,
I
pressed
further
to
understand
one
comment
that
was
a
bit
flippant,
which
was
oh
and
there
will
be
some
plans
addressed.
F
So
I
I
had
asked
what
he
meant
by
plans
would
be
done
and
that's
when
he
informed
me
that
this
he
would
be
looking
at
some
plans
within
the
city
that
they
have
access
to.
I
had
at
that
point
on
august
22nd
or
so
informed
him
that
we
had
actually
submitted
since
living
here
in
may,
2019
we've
we
haven't
had
the
opportunity
to
request
and
we
were
curious
what
the
city
had
for
building
plans.
F
So
we
I
we
had
an
open
request
for
requests
for
building
plans
with
the
zoning
and
development
which
was
at
that
point
in
time.
In
august,
20
20
21
was
a
couple
months
of
of
waiting.
F
F
So
we've
done
our
diligence
in
obviously
understanding
what
the
inspection
was.
We
were
told
it
was
about
safety.
We
were
then
made
aware
that
this
was
going
to
be
more
than
that,
and
we
were
aware
that
we
had
this
unfinished
basement
to
deal
with.
So
we
did.
We
allowed
the
city
to
come
on
september
27th.
F
So
the
inspection
happened.
We
gave
access
to
everything,
I'm
just
sorry.
G
We
never
received
the
report,
and
so
my
husband
contacted
vincent
some
time
after
the
inspection,
and
we
were
told
at
that
point
that
the
inspection
report
was
in
draft
format
and
as
such
we
would
not
receive
a
copy
of
the
report
until
it
was
finalized,
and
so
when
we
asked
him,
how
can
we
move
to
next
steps?
How
can
we
fix
any
of
the
issues
aware
now
that
our
our
basement
suite
was,
in
fact
not?
G
Actually
legal
we've
been
given
no
recourse
until
a
week
ago
as
to
what
we
can
and
we
still
haven't
been
we've
just
given
access
to
the
report
and
what
was
said
about
us,
we've
been
given
no
recourse
to
fix
the
problem.
F
Yeah,
so
we
only
received
the
obviously
the
revoking
of
the
short-term
rental
on
october
7th,
the
preceding
weeks
coming
weeks,
we
reached
out
to
short
term
as
well
as
vincent
we
tried
I
was
given
verbal.
I
was
told
by
short-term
to
talk
to
to
vincent.
We
talked
on
november
4th
of
2021
after
some
emails
were
exchanged.
F
I
was
informed
on
the
phone
that
the
report
was
in
draft
form.
The
contents
of
the
reports
itself
would
not
that
I
would
not
have
access
to
unless
I
request
an
access
to
for
the
report
via
the
freedom
of
information
act
to
get
it,
and
he
also
stated
that,
due
to
the
city's
position
on
short-term
rentals,
it
was
noted
that
all
these
inspection
reports
that
have
culminated
from
these
short-term
safety
inspections
were
stuck
in
limbo
for
an
indeterminate
period
of
time.
Even
though
the
cancellation
of
the
licenses
were
swift.
F
F
But
in
the
conversation
with
him
and
looking
at
the
basement
suite,
we
had
discussed
the
age
of
this
suite
and
he
had
noted,
which
I
had
commented
here,
that
it
looked
most
likely
40
years
ago,
40
years
old,
most
likely
done
after
the
last
permit
was
per
was
done,
which
was
only
for
a
sundeck
in
1973
or
75..
F
My
memory
eludes
me
there
on
the
exact
date.
As
as
mentioned,
we
followed
all
safety
guidelines,
the
premise
that
this
was
a
safety
inspection.
Primarily,
I
will
state
that
in
the
inspection
report
you
will
see
that
there
will
be
no
photo
of
a
fire
extinguisher
on
the
top
floor.
F
I
do
have
evidence
of
a
fire
extinguisher
that
was
present
and
still
present
on
the
top
floor,
yeah
so
outside
of
that
also
in
the
inspection
report,
something
that
we
have
learned
is
and-
and
I
kind
of
mentioned
as
well-
that
we
have
all
the
safety
regulations
and
and
requirements
in
our
premise.
This
is
a
40-some
year
old
unit
or
finished
space.
In
the
basement,
this
house
is
114
years
old.
F
It's
been
owned
by
multiple
families
throughout.
If
safety
is
a
concern,
then
I
would
like
to
understand
what
that
actually
means
in
the
terms
of
our
work
without
permits
being
sun
decks
in
a
fully
finished
basement
suite,
there
are
no
bars,
there
are
no
locks.
We
purchased
this
house
because
the
finished
basement
suite
looked
professionally
done.
F
If
we
were
to
try
to
make
this
into
an
entire
one-
single
family
dwelling
house,
for
instance,
because
we
do
have
the
staircase-
which
many
houses
in
vancouver
do
not
have-
and
as
mentioned
our
family,
do
stay
there
and
have
access
to
the
whole
house.
G
G
We
have
no
complaints
against
us.
Our
house
has
been
standing
for
a
very
long
time
is
very
safe
and
then,
when
the
inspector
came
in,
he
actually
wasn't
here
to
do
a
safety
inspection,
and
that
was
very
obvious.
He
was
not
interested
in
all
of
the
fire
extinguishers
and
all
the
safety
features
that
we
have
in
our
home.
It
was
very
clear
that
he
was
here
to
do
some
other
inspection,
which
was
ultimately
to
shut
us
down
as
a
short-term
rental,
and
that
was
the
entire
goal
of
what
he
was
here.
F
I
I
think
in
conclusion,
as
I've
mentioned,
we
have
not
received
anything
formal
only
verbally
through
draft
reports.
We
don't
know
where
our
inspection
report
lies
within
the
city.
Yes,
we
have
certain
things
that
we
need
to
address.
That
means
that
the
short-term
rental
license
is
in
question
here,
but
we're
hoping
that
what
we
can
provide
is
is
options
that
allow
us
to
to
continue
functioning
the
way
that
we
are,
as
we
navigate
the
the
waters
of
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
rectify
all
of
these.
F
As
mentioned,
it
was
very
swift
to
lose
the
license.
It
was
not
swift
in
understanding
what
we
needed
to
do
to
rectify
this
yeah
yeah.
I
believe,
really
the
stairways
connecting
all
floors,
including
the
basement
this.
This
can
be
a
one
family
dwelling.
We
can
have
the
we
can
remove
the
offending
range
and
whatever
is
defined
as
a
kitchen.
Potentially,
however,
what
we
were
told
by
the
inspector
was,
if
we
removed
the
range,
we
would
no
longer
have
this
as
a
suite.
F
B
Thank
you.
Thank
you
and
panel.
We
will
move
on
to
questions
counselors
we
board
diginova.
Do
you
have
any
questions?
I
see
councillor
d
genova
first
on
the
list,
so
go
ahead.
I
do.
A
Thank
you
chair,
and
thanks
very
much
to
to
both
of
you
to
the
applicants
for
for
coming
today
and
and
for
also
bringing
your
questions
sitting
on
business
license
panel
hearings.
I
understand
that
there
can
be
some
confusion
and
I
appreciate
what
you've
shared
my
questions
for
you
are.
Do
you
realize
that,
after
a
decision
of
this
hearing,
there
is
nothing
that's
saying
right
now
that
you
can't
that
precludes
you
from
moving
forward
with
rectifying
those
issues
that
you
had
mentioned?
A
A
I
have
to
ask
you
questions,
so
it
can't
just
be
comments
at
this
point,
but
are
you
aware
that,
with
the
short-term
rental
license,
you
would
have
to
be
renting
a
por,
the
the
portion
of
the
home,
that
you
consider
your
primary
residence
and
that
was
considered
your
primary
residence
so
that
that
would
be
that
could
be
possibly
you're
sweet
depending
on
what
the
definition
and
if
it
met
all
of
the
compliance
with
the
the
bylaws?
Are
you
aware
of
that
that,
as
long
as
it
was
your
primary
residence
as
well?
A
Okay,
so
so
those
are
my
questions
right
now
chair
and
I
I
will
leave
it
there
for
now.
B
C
G
C
G
F
I
I
had
emailed
ian
dixon
yesterday
asking
him
the
structure
of
this
meeting.
I
was
sent
actually
this
morning
the
opening
remarks
and
all
the
sections,
but
I
did
email
him
yesterday
asking
him
the
structure,
because
we
did
have
evidence
as
well
as
potentially.
We
would
have
liked
to
have
called
vincent
the
property
inspector
on
this
call,
but
unfortunately
that
is
something
that
yeah
I
I
missed.
C
Okay
thanks
next
one
when
the
safety
audit
was
done,
did
they
do
a
safety
out
of
the
whole
house?
So
did
they
check
life
and
safety,
like
you
said
for
fire
extinguishers
on
all
levels
of
the
house
and.
F
They
did
except
missing,
obviously
the
top
floor
extinguisher,
but
he
inspected
all
floors.
He
had
access
to
everything
on
our
property.
We
did
not
impede.
Also
we
provided
photos
and
I
noticed
an
inspection
report.
It
says
photos
taken.
Yes,
no,
there
was
no
consent
provided
by
the
inspector
when
he
came
in
here.
He
just
said
he
would
be
taking
photos,
so
we
weren't
going
to.
Obviously
you
know
impede
that,
but
yeah
we
he's
checked
everything
in
this
house.
B
A
If
that
would
be
appropriate
for
me
to
just
direct
some
clarifying
questions
to
mr
dixon
chair.
B
So
next
is
mr
dixon
asking
any
questions
of
the
witnesses,
but
but
I'll
clarify
when
the
moment
is
for
that
to
happen.
Yeah.
D
I
don't
have
any
questions
for
the
for
the
for
the
appellants.
B
Okay,
thank
you,
mr
dixon,
and
and
can
I
clarify
with
you
or
the
clerks,
if
or
when,
there's
an
opportunity
for
panel
members
through
the
chair
to
ask
any
further
questions
of
city,
legal
counsel,.
B
Okay,
then
councillor
de
genova,
I
will
forward
you
on
the
speakers
list
to
do
that.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
but
thanks
very
much
through
the
chair.
Just
wondering
is
this:
is
this
process
the
way
that
we
would
typically
see
a
process
happen
where
a
decision
would
have
to
be
made
on
this
matter
before
the
applicants
could
move
forward
to
rectify
anything
that
possibly
could
put
them
into
compliance
to
allow
them
to
move
forward
in
obtaining
a
business
license.
D
Yes,
because
the
business
license
can't
be
extend
whilst
there's
there's
work
without
permit,
that's
a
hard
stop
from
the
from
the
from
staff's
point
of
view
once
that's
rectified,
the
license
would
be
would
could
it
can
easily
be
issued,
but
at
this
job
at
this
moment
the
license
we
can't
the
city
city
cannot
allow.
The
bylaw
doesn't
allow
for
an
unpermitted
dwelling
to
be
to
be
occupied
as
a
short-term
rental.
D
So
the
license
has
to
be
suspended
because
it
doesn't
qualify
right
now,
so
it
would
have
to
be
immediately
be
suspended.
Bringing
items
into
compliance
is
I
just.
I
think
I
can
clarify
a
couple
of
things
that
that
have
been
said.
I
I
don't
know
why
the
why
the
inspector
referred
to
it
as
a
safety
audit.
D
The
city
has
the
ability
to
inspect
anyone's
property
at
any
time
for
any
reason,
and
so
the
the
reasons
for
it
are
often
not
not
provided
and
and
there's
no
legal
requirement
to
provide
the
reasons
for
an
inspection,
and
I
don't
know
why
I
was
described
the
way
that
the
way
that
it
was
and
all
inspections
are
by
the
the
inspector
is
supposed
to
observe
everything
that
they
can.
D
It's,
not
the
city's
general
process
to
set
out
chapter
and
verses
to
exactly
what
needs
to
be
done.
The
process
would
work
the
opposite
way
around
where
the
the
homeowner
comes
in
and
proposes.
D
I
propose
to
do
this
work
in
order
to
resolve
whatever
whatever
issues
and
obtain
the
necessary
permits,
the
the
comments
that
were
made
by
the
inspector
about
it
being
drafted
being
caught
up
that,
I
believe,
would
be
with
respect
to
and
I'm
sure
that
the
opponents
don't
want
to
hear
this,
but
there
it
is
open
to
the
city
to
prosecute
them
for
those
work
that
work
without
permit,
despite
the
fact
that
they
didn't
actually
do
the
work
without
permit.
D
Now
it's
unlikely
that
that
would
happen
in
this
circumstance,
but
it
may
be
that
process,
that's
being
that
is
in
terms
of
the
inspection
report
being
in
draft
and
being
being
withheld
for
a
period
of
time
and
caught
up
in
the
system.
So
those
are
just
paul.
A
I
do
have
a
couple
more
questions
for
you,
I'm
just
wondering
just
to
clarify,
because
I
have
been
on
these
panels
before,
as
as
have
you,
mr
dixon,
I'm
wondering
if
you
could
clarify
also
that
there
is
no
accusation
that,
after
they
receive
the
notice
that
they
have
continued
to
operate
outside
of
compliance
there's
there
is
nothing
being
brought
against
them,
saying
that
that's
what
they
have
done
since
that
time
is
that
correct.
D
That
is
absolutely
correct.
The
the
the
only
issue
here
is
whether
or
not
the
premises
themselves
are
eligible
for
a
short-term
rental
license
as
of
today,
not
whether
they
will
be
in
the.
A
Future,
if
this,
if,
if
their
business
license
and
other
questions
or
follow
up
through
the
chair,
was
suspended
today,
that
would
be
procedural
matter
where
it
would
not
in
in
any
way
prejudice
whether
or
not
they
could
get
another
permit.
If
they
came
into
compliance.
Is
that
correct.
D
Perhaps
if
I
could
clear
clear
up,
because
it
is
slightly
procedurally
odd
at
this
juncture
because
of
the
the
change
of
year-
is
that
the
decision
that's
actually
under
appeal
here-
is
the
suspension
of
the
business
license
that
occurred
in
2021,
so
the
decision
of
this
panel
would
be
either
to
upheld
or
uphold
or
or
overturn
that
decision.
D
For
whatever
reasons,
if
at
that
point,
if
it
was
upheld,
it
would
be
fairly
obvious
that
the
2022
license
wouldn't
be
issued
until
the
issue
of
the
work
without
permit
was
resolved
and
whether
or
not
this
was
an
eligible
license.
If
it
was
to
be
overturned,
then
that
would
potentially
make
a
2022
license.
D
Issuable
and
the
only
other
thing
that
I'll
say
at
this
juncture
with
regard
to
that
is
that
it's
not
open
to
this
panel
to
authorize
something
that
is
contrary
to
the
bylaw
you're,
not
sitting
as
counsel
right
now,
when
you're
sitting
as
counsel,
you
of
course
have
the
ability
to
change
and
alter
the
bylaw,
but
right
now
you
are
constrained
by
the
bylaw.
So,
unless,
in
order
to
allow
an
permit
issue,
you
would
have
to
find
that
this
was
a
part.
D
A
And
my
final
question
would
be
is
if
we
were,
if
this
panel
were
to
uphold
the
recommendations
made
by
made
by
the
chief
licensed
officer,
I'm
just
wondering:
could
it
say
that
the
property
in
question
is
currently
not
edge
eligible
for
short-term
rental
and
currently
would
would
further
explain
that
it's
it's
in
current
time.
Right
now,.
A
B
Go
ahead,
counselor,
weeb
and
I'll.
Add
myself,
four
or
one
or
two
clarifying
questions
as
well,
and
then
we'll
move
to
closing
statements
just
so
everyone
is
aware
of
where
we're
at.
C
Yeah
a
couple,
quick
questions:
what
is
the
process
if
no
notice
was
given
prior
to
the
order.
C
It
was
identified
that
the
clerks
had
not
contacted
the
homeowners
prior
to
the
order
being
delivered.
Is
that
something
that
has
to
be
part
of
the
process
to
ensure
natural
justice?
No,
it's
not.
D
The
okay
there's
a
specific
order,
power
in
the
bylaw
that
allows
at
any
time
for
an
order
to
be
issued
to
to
provide
access.
C
Okay,
so
not
prerequisite.
Second,
the
a
formal
order
to
comply
with
the
permit.
You
said
it's
up
to
the
homeowners
to
find
out
what
needs
to
be
done
to
be
in
compliance
and
to
get
the
permits
in
order.
If
this
is
a
life
and
safety
thing,
wouldn't
the
city
want
to
be
working
with
the
homeowners
to
make
sure
that
it's
a
safe
place
for
them
and
their
family
to
live
in.
D
C
D
Would
issue
the
order
and
we
might
move
forward,
but
then
we,
then
they
need
to
they're
the
ones
who
are
in
control
of
coming
in
to
apply
for
the
for
the
permits
and
to
identify
and
to
determine
in
what
manner
they
want
to
regularize
it.
Because
at
this
juncture
we
don't
actually
know
what
they
want
to
do.
In
particular,
we
can
say:
look
these
aren't
on
the
plans,
but
we
can't
generate
the
the
city,
can't
generate
the
plans
and
like
and
determine
what
what
what
exactly
they
want
to
do
with
their
property.
D
B
Thanks
counselor
we've
been,
I
also
just
wanted
to
clarify
and
mr
dixon
I'm
aware
this.
This
is
sort
of
a
bigger
city
process
question
but
interested
to
know
what
the
what
the
homeowner's
options
are,
what
the
supports
of
the
city
are
to
meet
with
them
and
help
lay
out
options.
After
this,
it's
clear
there's
a
lot
of
confusion.
I
think
we
all
understand
that
city
processes
can
be
confusing
for
for
any
of
us,
so
is.
Would
the
next
step
be
to
reach
out
to
the
planning
department
or
what.
D
There
is
a
whole
established
process
for
regularizing
illegal
suites
people
go
through
it
on
a
fairly
regular
basis.
I
don't
have
a
at
my
fingertips
exactly
how
that
process
works,
but
my
understanding
is
that
you
would
you
would
go
in
and
meet
with
the
with
the
building
department
say
I
want
to
regularize
this
suite.
There's
a
there's,
a
an
application
fee
and
a
comprehensive
inspection
that
gets
done
that
initiates.
That
process.
D
And
just
to
just
to
clarify
that
part
of
the
reason
for
that
is,
is
that
the
person
who
did
this
inspection
as
a
property
use
inspector
and
the
property
use
inspector
simply
looks
at
the
plans
and
says
this
doesn't
conform
with
the
pla
with
the
what
we
have
on
file
in
order
to
regularize
it,
you
need
a
building
inspector,
a
plumbing
inspector,
an
electrical
inspector
to
be
able
to
have
a
look
at.
What's
actually
there
and
say:
okay,
that's
actually,
fine!
That's
that's
fine!
That's
fine!
D
You
just
need
to
apply,
but
what
you
have
here,
it
doesn't
require
any
upgrades
or
any
changes.
The
property
use
inspector
doesn't
have
the
the
necessary
expertise
to
do
that.
B
Okay
and
and
the
panel
wouldn't
need
to
give
direction
in
a
closing
motion
for
staff
to
meet
with
the
licensees.
Those
processes
exist
and
we
just
need
to
make
sure.
D
At
that
point,
and-
and
I'm
I
can
say
I
can-
I
can
offer
at
this
juncture
that
that
koji
and
I
will
will
provide
the
the
appellants
with
some
information
about
how
they
go
about
regularizing
those
suites
at
the
conclusion
of
this,
regardless
of
how
the
panel
decides
today,.
B
Okay,
I
appreciate
that
so
I
have
one
more
process
question
for
you,
mr
dixon,
which
is
the
licensees,
have
a
clarifying
question
as
well,
for
you
is
it
appropriate
for
them
to
ask
that
question
through
me
as
chair.
G
Okay,
thank
you
in
the
business.
G
Documents,
inspection
report
page
eight,
under
the
recommendations
it
says
that
zoning
and
development
letter
to
apply
for
the
required
permits
to
either
remove
or
retain
the
unapproved
alterations
within
60
days.
This
has
never
been
sent
or
received
on
our
end
is
that
60
days.
D
So
for
claire
that
you
don't
want
to
get
that
letter
to
be
honest
with
you,
that's
the
letter
that
that
initiates,
the
the
which
is
the
first
step
of
our
enforcement
procedure,
which
eventually
leads
to
prosecution.
If
it's
not
done
within
that
time,
it's
preferable.
If
you're,
not
they
they've
elected,
not
to
proceed
down
that
road.
B
Okay,
thank
you
so
we're
moving
now
to
closing
submissions
from
city
of
vancouver
council.
D
I
think
you
take
my
take
my
point
at
this
point.
The
suspension
was
issued
as
a
result,
and
this
is
a
this-
is
an
unfortunate
situation
in
terms
of
the
work
without
permit
in
below
in
in
the
building.
Generally,
that's
that's
a
circumstance
that
crops
up
not
infrequently
in
vancouver
for
the
reasons
that
that
the
appellants
said
it's
just
simply
not
a
great
deal
of
time
when
you're
trying
to
buy
a
house
in
the
current
vancouver
market,
and
unfortunately,
people
get
caught
in
these
types
of
situations.
D
Where
they're
not
aware
of
illegal
illegal
work
without
permit
in
their
in
their
house,
it
can
be
brought
into
into
into
compliance
it
will
it
will
cost
some
money
to
do,
but
that
so
at
this
juncture,
because
of
that
work
without
permit
the
city's,
not
in
a
position-
and
this
panel
is
not
in
a
position
to
issue
a
a
license.
The
bylaw
is
very
clear
that
we're
that
a
dwelling
unit
that
contained
that
an
illegal
dwelling
unit
or
an
unpermanent
dwelling
unit
can't
be
licensed
as
an
str
as
a
secondary
issue.
D
There
is
the
issue
about
whether
once
it
got
gets
brought
into
compliance
with
the
with
the
necessary
with
the
with
the
zoning
bylaw
and
the
building
bylaw
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
whether
or
not
it
would
then
be
eligible
for
short-term
rental
license
and
the
the
appointments
have
raised
some
interesting
questions
with
regard
to
that
as
it
currently
is
constructed.
It's
it's
my
submission.
D
It
would
not
qualify
right
now
because
of
the
what
is
clearly
a
kitchen
right
now,
obviously,
that
kitchen
area
could
be
reduced
and
maybe
something
that
they
wish
to
reduce
in
order
to
allow
them
to
to
do
that,
I
don't
know
how
what
value
that's
a
choice
for
the
for
the
appellants
to
make,
but
as
it's
currently
constructed,
even
if
it
was
eligible,
even
if
it
was
not
work
without
permit,
it
wouldn't
be
eligible
for
short-term
rental,
because
it's
not
the
primary
primary
resident.
D
The
separate
unit
which
we
would
define
based
on
the
kitchen
is
not
is
not
a
separate
unit.
D
You
don't
have
to
go
down
that
road,
because
the
work
without
permit
for
2021
what
appears
to
be
the
the
the
my
submission
is
the
appropriate
course
of
action
to
this
juncture,
and-
and
in
my
submission
you
are
constrained
by
the
bylaw-
is
to
find
that
this
is
not
currently
eligible
for
a
short-term
rental
license
this
this
property,
but
that
there
is
no
reason-
and
if
you
can
put
this
in
your
decision,
if
you
wish
there's
a
there's,
no
reason
that
once
it
is
once
the
work
without
permit
is
resolved,
that
they
can't
apply
again
for
a
short-term
rental
license.
D
And
then
we
would
of
course
do
a
new
assessment
about
the
in
new
circumstances
and
that's
basically,
this
the
city
submissions.
With
regard
to
this.
B
Okay,
thank
you,
mr
dixon.
Are
there
closing
a
reply
or
closing
submission
from
the.
F
Licensees,
no,
I
think,
we've
we've
said
everything
that
we
we
can
say
in
the
matter,
and
we
we
just
asked
that.
Obviously,
yes,
we
understand
the
circumstances
here.
We
are
willing
and
able
and
have
shown
that
we
want
to
work
with
the
city.
F
Obviously
we
are
trying
our
best
to
figure
it
all
out
ourselves
as
well
and
learning
quite
a
bit
yeah
and
and
we're
hopefully
being
able
to
to
come
to
some
clarification
and
some
amendments
that
allow
us
to
to
function
in
the
process
that
is
now
going
to
be
months
and
months
and
months
it's
in
potentially
years.
I
I
have
no
idea,
but
it's
not
going
to
be
something
that
will
be
rectified
in
in
a
given
week
or
two
so
yeah
that
that
is,
unfortunately,
the
nature
that
we're
in
we've
inherited
this.
F
But
it
is
a
very
safe
house
and
and-
and
I
would
not
want
my
family
living
in
an
unsafe
house-
we
had
it
inspected
we're
willing
to
go
through
the
processes.
But
hopefully
you
know
in
this
circumstance
we
can
come
to
some.
You
know
mutually
beneficial
to
some
degree
agreement
but
yeah
we'll
leave
that
judgment
for
you
guys.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you
and
so
we're
moving
to
discussion
from
the
business
license.
Hearing
panel
and
I
see
councillor
diet
nova
on
the
list.
Go
ahead.
Counselor
teach
nova.
A
Thanks
so
much
I've
taken
the
liberty
of
of
just
adding
and-
and
I'm
I'm
hoping,
maybe
true
you
chair,
mr
dixon,
could
take
a
look
at
this,
but
at
his
his
recommendation
that
it
wouldn't
be
out
of
order
to
add
something
that
just
further
offered
assurance
that
there
could
possibly
you
know,
be
another
application.
If
this
was
brought
into
compliance,
I
I
haven't
sent
in
a
motion,
so
I've
circulated
that
through
our
our
meeting
amendments
and
I've
also
copied
mr
dixon
on
that.
A
B
I
am
just
seeing
it
and
I
will
ask
legal
if
the
wording
is.
D
I've
had
a
chance
to
review
it
and
I
would
simply
say
that
councillor
nova,
the
the
first,
the
the
the
first
statement
that
the
business
license
hearing
panel
it
should
be
uphold.
The
suspension
of
the
2021
business
license.
A
Oh
okay,
all
right,
I'm
happy
to
do
that
chair.
If
it's
perhaps
I
could
have
a
recess
just
for
two
minutes.
Would
that
be
all
right.
B
Yes
sure,
let's
make
sure
that
we're
doing
this
properly.
So
if
you
want
to
draft
that
we'll
just
take
a
two
minute.
A
You
very
much-
and
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
if
I
could,
before
that
recess,
that
mr
dixon
had
said
that
it
should
say
the
business
license.
Hearing
panel
uphold
the
decision
of
the
chief
license
officer
license.
D
Inspector
to
sorry,
chief.
A
A
A
Think
we
do
anymore,
I'm
sorry
for
that
procedural
misstep
there
and
I
will
put
this
board
hadn't
been
seconded,
so
it
would
now
read-
and
maybe
I'll
give
you
a
moment
to
review
that
chair
as
well
as
mr
dixon
apologies
for
any
errors.
I
have
from
typing
on
the
fly.
D
A
So
and
and
then
I
will
comment
on
my
reasons
for
bringing
this
motion.
If
it's
seconded
that
the
business
license
hearing
panel
uphold
the
decision
of
the
chief
licensed
inspector
to
suspend
the
2021
business
license
known
as
business
license
issued
to
daniel
pikachu,
I
hope
I
got
that
right
and
sheena,
graham
the
licensees
for
a
short-term
rental
accommodation
at
1351,
east
19th
avenue
in
vancouver
bc,
on
the
basis
that
the
property
in
question
is
not
currently
eligible
for
short-term
rental
under
the
city
of
vancouver's
licensed
by-law
number,
four,
four:
five
zero.
A
Furthermore,
if
brought
into
compliance
apologies,
I
just
lost
that.
Furthermore,
if
brought
into
compliance,
there
is
no
reason.
1351,
east
19th
avenue,
vancouver
bc
would
not
be
eligible
for
a
short-term
rental
license
under
the
city
of
vancouver's,
license
by
law,
number
4450
and
I'll
I'll
wait
to
hear
from
you.
If
we
can
move
forward
with
that
motion
and
then
I'll
comment
on
it
sure.
C
B
A
To
the
licensees,
daniel
and
sheena,
if
I
may
call
you
that
I
I
really
do
empathize
with
the
situation
that
you're
in,
and
I
really
do
appreciate
that
that
you
tried
to
be
proactive
and
do
everything
you
could
and
you
did
not
operate
when
you
were
not
in
compliance.
You
ceased
to
operate.
I
do
appreciate
that
and
I
think
that
that
shows
a
lot
of
goodwill.
A
A
I
would
hope
that
this
gives
you
assurance
that,
although
we
have
to
uphold
our
bylaws
at
the
city
of
vancouver,
there's
no
reason
that
you
cannot
move
forward
and
come
into
compliance,
and
I
hope
that
you
will
be
able
to
take
those
steps.
I
understand
that
it
is
more
of
a
process,
and
I
also
appreciate
the
fact
that
our
staff,
you
know
from
legal
and
licensing,
have
offered
to
help
to
help
you
find
your
way
through
that
process
or
to
that
process.
A
Unfortunately,
because
this
has
come
before
us,
we
have
to
rule
based
on
the
merits
of
what
we
have
before
us
in
the
evidence
package.
But
I
do
hope
that
this
will
offer
you
the
tools
that
you
need
to
move
forward
to
come
into
compliance.
And
I
very
much
appreciate
how
open
you've
been
and
proactive.
You've
been
in
what
you've
tried
to
do
in
in
in
making
sure
that
you
abide
with
the
bylaws
of
the
city
of
vancouver.
B
Thank
you,
councilor
diet,
nova.
I
don't
see
anyone
else
on
the
list,
so
I'm
just
going
to
echo
myself
that
that
we
are
certainly
conscious
of
how
both
of
how
stressful
housing
and
real
estate
are
in
vancouver
and
how
complex
some
of
these
permitting
issues
can
be.
That's
not
isolated
to
this
incident
and
it's
a
and
it's
an
issue.
B
We
all
thinking
and
worry
a
lot
about
and
and
that
the
city
is
working
on
a
number
of
fronts,
to
try
to
clarify
so
as
counselor
teach
nova
articulated.
Well,
I
think
we
are
all
sympathetic
to
these
challenges
absolutely
and
keen
to
figure
out
the
the
appropriate
pathways
of
support
that
make
it
easier.
Well,
of
course,
being
conscious
of
our
in
a
quasi-judicial
hearing,
our
our
obligation
to
be
upholding
existing
bylaws
without
a
lot
of
wiggle
room.
B
Well
that
well
that
work
happens
as
well.
So
I
will
I'm
just
checking
counselor
weeb
anything
to
add
before
we
move
to
a
vote.
C
Yeah
just
quickly,
I
appreciate
everyone
who
spent
time
and
the
ideas
have
been
brought
to
the
table
because
it
has
highlighted
some
issues
we
do
have
and
some
process
work
that
we
can
work
on.
So
I
really
appreciated
this
process
and
hopefully
we
can
find
a
resolution
moving
forward.
So
thanks
for
spending
the
time
and
doing
your
research
and
being
forth
for
coming
on
everything,
you've
done
and
appreciate
staff's
time
on
understanding
the
issue
and
working
through
the
process.
So
I
will
be
supportive.
B
Thanks
counselor
weeb,
okay
panel,
we
are
moving
to
a
vote.
I'm
just
going
to
do
a
a
verbal
vote
and
asked
all
in
favor
to
say
yay,
yay
and
any
opposed.
B
So
the
motion
carries.
That
concludes
this
business
license
hearing
and
appreciate
the
the
work
that
has
and
thought
that's
gone
into
it
and
the
follow-up
that
we
have
heard
will
happen
next.